Research into more than 700 cases handled by law firm Pannone’s family department over the last two years shows a significant increase in cases involving couples wanting to start proceedings in countries where they believe they might get a better settlement. Pannone also claim that businessmen are more likely than ever to issue proceedings overseas to avoid what they see as ‘wife-friendly settlements’ in British courts.

Pannone Senior Associate Vicki McLynn said: “Husbands and wives are effectively racing to be the first to begin divorces in countries they feel could deliver judgements which are more favourable to their respective circumstances. That is because the differences between certain countries are significant. The increase has been most noticeable in European countries as for most a ‘first past the post’ system operates in which a divorce will be handled in the country where the papers are first issued.

Spouses have to demonstrate some justification for divorcing in a given country. However, because there is now such a large number of people living and working abroad, a growing proportion of individuals qualify.”

In comparison to British courts which can award ex-wives maintenance for life, many other countries are seen as less favourable to non-working and less wealthy spouses, for example by limiting post-marital support to a period of three years.

The European Union recently moved to halt the process of so-called “forum shopping” by introducing regulations to dictate where proceedings should be issued if the couple cannot agree.

For more information on issuing divorce proceedings please contact Alistair Dobson on 01858 445 480 or James Haworth on 0116 212 1080.

As the recession continues to pinch the family finances, arguments about how to split the Tesco Clubcard or Nectar points are sending couples back to their lawyers said Pannone Partner Ed Kitchen: “Establishing a fair divorce settlement involves calculating what someone will lose out on as a result of not being married. Traditionally, that has meant considering things like pensions or health insurance. Now, though, people realise the value of points accrued through loyalty schemes.”

It seems many couples are finding it harder to divide the loyalty points and Airmiles than they are to settle the rest of their finances. With over 30m Nectar or Tesco Clubcard members in the UK and 120m people worldwide part of frequent flyer programmes, loyalty schemes deliver great savings which divorcing couples are loath to sacrifice.

For more information on any aspect of divorce please contact James Haworth at Lawson-West on 0116 212 1080.

The report on the interim recommendations of the Family Justice Review, said that an increase in litigants in person would be inevitable following the removal of legal aid in the majority of private family law cases, and that the courts would need to adapt to dealing with people representing themselves.

The MPs who prepared the report welcomed the move to require all parties to consider mediation before going to court when divorcing, and also the government’s continued commitment to fund mediation for those eligible for legal aid.

Justice Committee chair Sir Alan Beith commented: ‘Many family disputes could be better dealt with by mediation than in a court. However, there will still be cases which go to court and there will be significantly more litigants in person following changes to legal aid. Courts are going to have to make adjustments to cope with more people representing themselves in what are often emotionally charged cases.’

However, the government plans would mean they would have to pay a ‘spare room penalty’ and would be worse off as they’d have to meet the housing costs for fostered children themselves. The spare room penalty has been set at 13% for those with one spare room and 23% for those with two or more spare rooms. The DWP suggested people in these situations should ‘move to accommodation which better reflects the size and composition of their household’ – or make up the shortfall in housing benefit from other income sources.

Within four years of launching, some 127 SDVC’s has been created. However, 23 of these are among the 142 courts tabled for closure during this parliament, and are located across the country from Whitehaven to Lewes.

The role of the SDVC is to provide independent advisers for victims of domestic violence, along with dedicated prosecutors, specialist magistrates and police officers. An important feature of the SDVC is that it has separate areas to make sure victims are not at risk of meeting their attackers.

The service is to be run in partnership with Child Maintenance Options which is an information service provided by the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission. When a parent who receives tax credits phones HMRC to report a change in circumstances following family breakdown, they can now elect to have a call-back from the Child Maintenance Options service.

An estimated 91,000 children are already benefiting from collaborative family-based maintenance arrangements agreed between parents after they had contacted Child Maintenance Options. It is now estimated that around 60,000 people a year could benefit under the new initiative.

For information on children and divorce or relationship breakdown please contact Alistair Dobson on 01858 445 480.

In a Supreme Court ruling last week, Lady Hale extended the definition of ‘domestic violence’ in cases concerning a local authority’s duty to provide housing for people who have become homeless as a result of such violence.

The case involved a mother who left home with her two children due to her husband’s behaviour. Although he had never hit her, she was afraid he might do so if she confronted him about his behaviour which included shouting in front of the children.

The housing officers responsible decided she was not in fact homeless because her husband had never hit her nor had he threatened to do so. They therefore felt that there was a low probability of domestic violence so it was reasonable for her to stay in the matrimonial home.

Under the Housing Act 1996, domestic violence includes physical violence, threatening or intimidating behaviour and any other form of abuse that, directly or indirectly, may give rise to the risk of harm. In her judgment of the case, Lady Hale found that as well as meaning physical contact, the word ‘violence’ in this context could also mean ‘strength or intensity of emotion, fervour, passion.’ The Council therefore had a duty to house the woman and her children.

The Law Society’s council member for child care, Christina Blacklaws, commented that this was a ‘hugely significant and extremely welcome’ judgment which would give victims of domestic violence greater access to justice in respect of family and housing law. She said: ‘Having the Supreme Court recognise the multi-faceted and complex nature of domestic violence is of enormous importance and should herald a return to better decision-making by local authorities.’

Meanwhile, the proportion of people who are divorced has been slowly rising, and is up from 2 per cent in mid-1979 to 8 per cent in mid-2009. An increasing number of people are also staying single, which will come as no surprise to most of us!